On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 05:31:54AM -0700, Nilesh Javali wrote:
> From: Arun Easi <aeasi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Add a remote port debugfs entry to get/set dev_loss_tmo for NVMe
> devices.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arun Easi <aeasi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Himanshu Madhani <hmadhani@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Nilesh Javali <njavali@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_dfs.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_dfs.c b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_dfs.c
> index 3c4b9b549b17..7482e6bf7f7f 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_dfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_dfs.c
> @@ -12,6 +12,57 @@
> static struct dentry *qla2x00_dfs_root;
> static atomic_t qla2x00_dfs_root_count;
>
> +#define QLA_DFS_RPORT_DEVLOSS_TMO 1
> +
> +static int
> +qla_dfs_rport_get(struct fc_port *fp, int attr_id, u64 *val)
> +{
> + switch (attr_id) {
> + case QLA_DFS_RPORT_DEVLOSS_TMO:
> + /* Only supported for FC-NVMe devices that are registered. */
> + if (!(fp->nvme_flag & NVME_FLAG_REGISTERED))
> + return -EIO;
> + *val = fp->nvme_remote_port->dev_loss_tmo;
> + break;
> + default:
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int
> +qla_dfs_rport_set(struct fc_port *fp, int attr_id, u64 val)
> +{
> + switch (attr_id) {
> + case QLA_DFS_RPORT_DEVLOSS_TMO:
> + /* Only supported for FC-NVMe devices that are registered. */
> + if (!(fp->nvme_flag & NVME_FLAG_REGISTERED))
> + return -EIO;
> + return nvme_fc_set_remoteport_devloss(fp->nvme_remote_port,
> + val);
> + default:
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +#define DEFINE_QLA_DFS_RPORT_RW_ATTR(_attr_id, _attr) \
> +static int qla_dfs_rport_##_attr##_get(void *data, u64 *val) \
> +{ \
> + struct fc_port *fp = data; \
> + return qla_dfs_rport_get(fp, _attr_id, val); \
> +} \
> +static int qla_dfs_rport_##_attr##_set(void *data, u64 val) \
> +{ \
> + struct fc_port *fp = data; \
> + return qla_dfs_rport_set(fp, _attr_id, val); \
> +} \
> +DEFINE_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE(qla_dfs_rport_##_attr##_fops, \
> + qla_dfs_rport_##_attr##_get, \
> + qla_dfs_rport_##_attr##_set, "%llu\n")
> +
> +DEFINE_QLA_DFS_RPORT_RW_ATTR(QLA_DFS_RPORT_DEVLOSS_TMO, dev_loss_tmo);
> +
> void
> qla2x00_dfs_create_rport(scsi_qla_host_t *vha, struct fc_port *fp)
> {
> @@ -24,6 +75,9 @@ qla2x00_dfs_create_rport(scsi_qla_host_t *vha, struct fc_port *fp)
> fp->dfs_rport_dir = debugfs_create_dir(wwn, vha->dfs_rport_root);
> if (!fp->dfs_rport_dir)
> return;
> + if (NVME_TARGET(vha->hw, fp))
> + debugfs_create_file("dev_loss_tmo", 0600, fp->dfs_rport_dir,
> + fp, &qla_dfs_rport_dev_loss_tmo_fops);
> }
>
> void
> --
> 2.19.0.rc0
>
Hi Arun,
I don't think that the setting should be in debugfs. IMO there should be
separate fc_remote_ports entry for FCP and FC-NVMe, one per PRLI for
multi-protocol targets.
That'd be consistent with what exists for FCP and would allow
similar configuration of dev_loss_tmo from multipath. It'd also provide
semantics of per-rport PRLO to allow logout from either of the protocol
but leaving second rport/session online.
Thanks,
Roman
